Gaming Performance Comparison
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GT 230 v2 1.5GB are significantly better than the Nvidia Quadro FX 4500.
The GT 230 was released over three years more recently than the Quadro FX 4500, and so the GT 230 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Quadro FX 4500 when running the latest games.
The GT 230 has 1024 MB more video memory than the Quadro FX 4500, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, overall, the Quadro FX 4500 has superior memory performance.
The Quadro FX 4500 has 12.8 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the GT 230, which means that the memory performance of the Quadro FX 4500 is slightly better than the GT 230.
The GeForce GT 230 v2 1.5GB has 96 Shader Processing Units and the Quadro FX 4500 has 8. However, the actual shader performance of the GT 230 is 120 and the actual shader performance of the Quadro FX 4500 is 4. The GT 230 having 116 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GT 230 delivers a marginally smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the Quadro FX 4500.
The GeForce GT 230 v2 1.5GB requires 75 Watts to run and the Quadro FX 4500 requires 109 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 300 Watts for the GT 230 and a PSU with at least 450 Watts for the Quadro FX 4500. The Quadro FX 4500 requires 34 Watts more than the GT 230 to run. The difference is significant enough that the Quadro FX 4500 may have a slight adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the GT 230.
Check any game system requirements
| |
| Core Speed | 500 MHz |  | vs | | 470 MHz |
|---|
| Architecture | Tesla G94b | | | | G70GL |
|---|
| Notebook GPU | no | | | | no |
|---|
| SLI/Crossfire | no | | vs | | no |
|---|
| Dedicated | yes |  | vs |  | yes |
|---|
| Release Date | 01 Oct 2009 | | | | 28 Jul 2005 |
|---|
| GPU Link | GD Link | | | | GD Link |
|---|
| Approved |  | | | |  |
|---|
| Comparison | | | | | |
|---|
| |
| Memory | 1536 MB |  | vs | | 512 MB |
|---|
| Memory Speed | 500 MHz | | vs |  | 575 MHz |
|---|
| Memory Bus | 192 Bit | | vs |  | 256 Bit |
|---|
| Memory Type | DDR2 | | vs |  | GDDR3 |
|---|
| Memory Bandwidth | 24GB/sec | | vs |  | 36.8GB/sec |
|---|
| L2 Cache |
- |
|
vs |
|
- |
| Comparison | | | | | |
|---|
| |
| Shader Processing Units | 96 |  | vs | | 8 |
|---|
| Actual Shader Performance | 120 |  | vs | | 4 |
|---|
| Technology | 55nm |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Texture Mapping Units | 48 |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Texture Rate | 24 GTexel/s |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Render Output Units | 12 |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Pixel Rate | 6 GPixel/s |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Comparison | | | | | |
|---|
| |
| DirectX | 10 |  | vs | | 9.0c |
|---|
| Shader Model | 4.0 |  | vs | | 3.0 |
|---|
| Open GL | 3.1 |  | vs | | 2.1 |
|---|
| Max Resolution (WxH) | 2560x1600 |  | vs |  | 2560x1600 |
|---|
| VGA Connections | 1 |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| DVI Connections | 1 | | vs |  | 2 |
|---|
| HDMI Connections | 1 |  | vs | | - |
|---|
| Comparison | | | | | |
|---|
| |
| Max Power | 75 Watts |  | vs | | 109 Watts |
|---|
| |
| Recommended RAM | 3 GB | | | | - |
|---|
| Recommended Screen Size | 1366x768 | | | | - |
|---|
| Recommended PSU | 300 Watts & 25 Amps |  | vs | | 450 Watts |
|---|
| |
| Performance Value | | |  | | |
|---|
| |
| Mini Review | GeForce GT 230 1.5GB (second revision) is a middle-class GFX based on the 2009, 55nm, first-generation unified architecture.
It's based on the G92 (B1 Variant) Core and offers 96 Shader Processing Units, 48 TMUs and 12 ROPs, on a 192-bit memory interface of standard DDR2. The central unit runs at 500MHz and the memory clock operates at up to 500MHz.
Compared to the first revision, it should perform considerably better at lower resolutions.
Today's modern demanding games will have to be played at low or medium settings to achieve fluent frame rates. DirectX 11 games aren't supported. | | | | The Quadro line of GPU cards emerged in an effort at market segmentation by NVIDIA. In introducing Quadro, NVIDIA was able to charge a premium for essentially the same graphics hardware in professional markets, and direct resources to properly serve the needs of those markets. To differentiate their offerings, NVIDIA used driver software and firmware to enable features vital to segments of the workstation market; e.g., high performance anti-aliased lines and two-sided lighting were reserved for the Quadro product. In addition, improved support through a certified driver program was put in place. These features were of little value in the gaming markets that NVIDIA's products already sold to, but prevented high end customers from using the less expensive products. This practice continues even today although some products use higher capacity faster memory. |
|---|